K PATTABIRAMAN Vs. K BANUMATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) First defendant in O.S. No. 57 of 1996 on the file of Prl. Subordinate Judge, Virudhachalam, aggrieved by the order in LA. No 592 of 2000 dated 12.7.2000, has filed the above revision.

(2.) The respondents 1 to 4 herein filed civil suit in O.S. No 57 of 1996 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Virudhachalam for partition and separate possession. The first respondent herein is the brother of the petitioner's wife and respondents 2 to 4 are his children. The petitioner herein has filed a written statement and resisted the suit inter alia contended that the suit items had already been apportioned and there is no necessary for the suit. The plaintiffs have let in evidence. When the petitioner herein- first defendant was in the witness box filed a document purported to be a partition deed dated 29.8.1978, this was objected by the plaintiffs that it is an unregistered document and could not be admitted. It is the case of the petitioner that the document could not be registered, since it is only a record of past and present transaction and though not registered, required stamp duty has been paid. It is also stated that it could be used for collateral purpose. By the impugned order dated 12.7.2000, the learned Subordinate Judge refused permission to file the said document, against which the petitioner filed the above revision.

(3.) In spite of service of notice on all the respondents, none of them have chosen to contest the above revision by engaging a Counsel.